California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Talbott v. Csakany, 199 Cal.App.3d 700, 245 Cal.Rptr. 136 (Cal. App. 1988):
Estes v. Gibson, supra, 257 S.W.2d at page 608, further reasons when the party sought to be charged had no control over or ownership interest in the machine, the causation is too tenuous and remote because there are too many probable and imponderable intervening events and conditions between the gift of the car and the negligent operation. However, a three judge minority in Estes dissented, asserting persons who transfer ownership and control are more negligent since they knowingly have given an incompetent driver the power to use the vehicle at all times, thus creating a long-term risk to third persons. ( Estes v. Gibson, supra, 257 S.W.2d at p. 608.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.